I’ve read most of Mr. Brown’s works. Heck, I got my first introduction to non-interventionism when he created a character he called Thomas Nathaniel Thorn and placed him in the Oval Office. Mr. Brown tends to favor quick, surgical strikes to achieve goals – even when those goals involve interfering in another nation’s internal business. But the weapons in his books… as a tech geek, I just gotta say they are SUPER cool. Interestingly, he debuted one – Sensor Fuzed Weapons – about 5 yrs before they debuted on the battlefield – during the opening stages of Iraq II, when we were still battling an actual Iraqi army.

Update Jan 24, 2009: Currently reading Mr. Brown’s Plan of Attack, about a fictitious Russian nuclear attack on the US.

ARTICLE ORIGINALLY APPEARED AT TheBigFiveOh.com Blog @ Yahoo.Com, December 01, 2008

First off: Happy Birthday, Mom!

It looks to me like President-elect Barack Obama’s honeymoon will be much longer than 100 days. The honeymoon actually started at the 2004 Democratic National Convention, but as it’s shaping up, it’s going to continue on for quite some time.

No one has said “boo” to anything Obama has done so far:

Kark Rove is an evil genius but Rahm Emanuel is just “partisan” and “feisty?”

Eric Holder recommends the pardon of fugitive Marc Rich and the FALN terrorists that committed 120 bomb attacks in the U.S. over a 9 year period…but no one says anything about it? If he was a Republican, the outrage would be so loud and boisterous that he would be forced to remove his name from nomination. But not Holder, or Obama.

Alberto Gonzales was far more qualified to be attorney general than Holder, but the hue and cry was out for him the day he was nominated, and he didn’t have a moment’s peace while in office.

Today Obama nominated Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton as Secretary of State. Qualifications? What qualifications? She traveled to 80 countries as First Lady? Obama was right when he said during the campaign that drinking tea with other wives of heads of state is no foreign policy qualification. Serving in the Senate? She served 6 years, 2 of which were on the campaign trail. Serving on the Armed Services Committee? What landmark policy stands did she ever have? What important programs did she champion?

Her nomination is clearly political. How is this “change?” What change? It’s politics as usual. Bill O’Reilly said he thought choosing Hillary was good. What? Again, Bill, what experience? She has a famous name and is obviously a tough cookie, but what other qualifications does she have besides the legions of Clinton supporters who Obama needed to bring back to his side?

What I hear from the press is the word “pragmatic.” Obama is not lying, or waffling, or flip-flopping, or disregarding his electorate–he’s being pragmatic. He’s also being flexible and leaving himself “room to maneuver.” He says that he’s picking persons with experience and that the change that he promised was going to come from HIM. HE is the change.

He can say “change” all he wants, but when I see the same old faces standing beside him, I don’t see any change.

I agree with some of his appointments. Robert Gates continuing as Secretary of Defense: good. Obama will take all the credit when Gates’s Iraq and Afghanistan policies are proven to work.

Governor Bill Richardson as Secretary of Commerce? Good. I like Richardson. I think his talents will be wasted at Commerce, but he’s good.

General Jim Jones as National Security Adviser? Good, and maybe better as Secretary of Defense when Gates moves on.

Janet Napolitano as Secretary of Homeland Security? OK. Another political appointment. She has experience with border security issues but not much with anti-terrorist ones, but she has legal and executive experience.

But where are the fresh faces Obama promised us? Where are the bold ideas, the new directions, the change? Not happening. Where are the young superstars, men and women like Obama himself, who will become the new generation of leaders?

What about getting out of Iraq in 16 months? Again, Obama is being “pragmatic.” Now it’s getting the troops out “responsibly.” What does that mean? The Democrats wanted a timetable for getting out of Iraq, and they lambasted McCain for his open-ended commitment. But where’s Obama’s timetable? He hasn’t even said he would get the troops out before 2012 mandated by the new Status of Forces Agreement between the U.S. and Iraq.

Maybe it was after he started receiving the Presidential Daily Briefs, but Obama FINALLY realizes that a firm timetable for withdrawal would be a disaster. If he pulled troops out before the Iraqis were ready to defend their country, the internal political situation was more stable, and some kind of understanding was reached with Iran, the U.S. could find itself having to go back into Iraq, and his political career would be over.

I’ll give the President-elect a chance, but it’s not looking good so far to me. Yes, the YouTube talks are good. But I’m still looking for the change he promised–and I’m looking for the mainstream media to call him on it.